"The University of Illinois is also in turmoil. The university sports an Interim Chancellor, an Interim Athletic Director, and an Interim Football Coach; the game will be played at Soldier Field, making this an Illini Interim Home Game."
mattison kind of looks at him a little like "who are you again?"
Russell Crowe needs to return to the Big House and catch UM-ND under the lights this year. Many will remember him attending the 2007 UM-ND game at Lloyd's request and sporting a block M hat. Maybe Lloyd could give Brady Russell's number.
I thought this was a good article that clarified some thoughts I already had stewing around in my head. It sounds like Cam Newton had a very similar read progression that Denard had last year.
Essentially, I think Denard was at level 1 last year, which is all you need in college when you are faster than everyone else on the field. The West Coast Offense generally requires the quarterback to be at level 2 and the receivers need to make the same reads, although I did just read that a receiver sends a signal to the QB to let him know what they are reading, so the QB knows what to throw. That might mean the QB has less responsibility in this particular system.
However, moving from level 1 to level 2 could explain a lot about why Denard is having a hard time adjusting to the new system. Hopefully, he can take in more of the playbook and gain some more understanding during the off season and come out in the Fall ready to go.
Chengelis tweeted that Hoke says Hopkins has been the most consistent back so far
I came across this article on Doc Saturday. Having a couple econ degrees, I'm always interested in how professional economists view the BCS. This basically outlines how 20 of them signed a letter to the Fed detailing their issues with the BCS and antitrust law.
The thing I took from this article is that economists, politicians, and writers like Dan Wetzel live in a hypothetical fantasy-world.
I find they want equality but not fairness. As economists, I would think they would stand along the lines of fair free-market principles - that it's most economically fair for schools more people follow (via tv ratings, tickets, bowl attendance) to be compensated more, and those followed less should be compensated less; for-profit bowls allowed to invite the candidates best for their business; etc. - and that, in my opinion, would only further separate the haves and have-nots. Dissolving the BCS doesn't mean a playoff is imminent; If bowls can invite whomever they wish, I believe we'll see even less opportunity for the Boises and Utahs (pre-Pac-12) of the world.
Thoughts? (I hope this doesn't end as a playoff vs. bcs argument, instead as a discussion of economic merit for BCS vs. dissolution)
As promised yesterday, I emailed BTN to see if they would be streaming the Michigan Spring Game on their website like last year. I just heard back, and no dice:
Thanks for the email. The Big Ten Network will broadcast the Michigan Spring Football Game live at noon ET on Saturday. We are unable to domestically stream games that we broadcast due to contractual obligations with our cable and satellite affiliates. You might check our Game Finder tool and enter your zip code to find out which providers in your area carry the Big Ten Network.
Sorry everybody, it looks like we're off to the nearest bar bright and early Saturday morning.